Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA, J
A.Shanmugam – Appellant
Versus
Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Land Reforms, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – Respondent
ORDER :
P.T.Asha, J.
The Writ Petition No.12048 of 2024 is filed for a certiorarifed mandamus to quash the order passed by the second respondent dated 12.04.2024 and remit the matter back to the second respondent for conducting denovo enquiry.
2.The main ground of challenge to the above impugned order was that petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing before the impugned order was passed.
3.The facts which have culminated in the filing of the above Writ Petition is herein below set out:-
The impugned order which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court according to the petitioner is nothing but a repeat of the earlier order which has passed on 02.03.2023 and corrected as 07.03.2023. The impugned order appealed against the order passed by the third respondent rejecting the petitioner's request for modification of the entries in the Record of Tenancy Rights and to substitute the petitioner's name as the cultivating tenant in the place of his father. The petitioner would contend that his father was a cultivating tenant in respect of the lands which comprised in S.No.206/1, 693/1, 693/2, 693/3, 722/1, 722/2, 722/3, 722/4 and 723, Nanjundapuram village, Coimbatore North
The court affirmed the necessity of a fair hearing and reasoned decisions by authorities in tenancy disputes.
The Appellate Authority's decisions based on presumed fraud, without substantial evidence, are unsustainable; prior tenancy records must be challenged through established procedures.
The court affirmed the plaintiff's status as a cultivating tenant based on revenue records, emphasizing that the appellate court erred in reversing the trial court's decision regarding possession.
The presumption of tenancy under the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act requires proof of lawful cultivation on the 'tillers day,' which the petitioner failed to establish.
Claim of a person to be a cultivating tenant has to be decided by the competent Authority under the provisions of the Act and such issue cannot be decided by the District Court as it is not a dispute....
Cultivating tenancies under Tamil Nadu law are not transferable, and a tenant must contribute physical labor to qualify as a statutory tenant.
The principle of res judicata applies to proceedings before quasi-judicial authorities, and subsequent applications cannot be entertained if the claim has been rejected in a previous order.
The court upheld the Tribunal's decision affirming tenant rights based on longstanding possession and admissions, indicating the strength of historical claims in tenancy disputes under the Tenancy Ac....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
